¶1No circumstances of surprize, accidentar fratid, appear to have intervened in this case, to prevent the party from having a full hearing in the County Court, upon the points, which form the ground of the application to the Court ef Equity ; Of these points, tho County Court, up-*11«11 petition, have equal and concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Equity. The bill is, therefore, dismissed with costs.
5 N.C. 9
Holding v. Holding
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided December 15, 1804
Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1804-12-15
In Equity. — Samuel Holding, sen. the testator, on the 9th day of May, 1797, made and published his last will and testament, and therein, amongst other things, devised a tract of land to the defendant, and other tracts to the complainants, Arthur and John Holding, liis sons; and directed that the several parcels of land thereby given to his three sons, Frederic, Arthur and John Holding, should be valued by good men, as woodland unimproved, and that the valuation so made,…
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1804
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1804-12-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →